Kyrie Irving's superstar potential being sold short by everyone

You know how sometimes, when a girl is a seven, she can deceitfully appear to be a ten based on the circumstances, most notably, based on the other women around her? (Example; any girl who walks onto a golf course.) Well you might think the same theory would apply for Kyrie Irving in that he headed a draft class that is unanimously considered to be historically bad, but if you thought that you would be wrong. Instead, it had the complete opposite affect.

For an overall number one pick, Kyrie Irving has been given a short ceiling by the majority of analysts and fans. There are a couple reasons as to why: Reason number 1) He played for Duke. Not the best factory at producing NBA stars. Reason number two) He only played 11 collegiate basketball games. Reason number 3) Because we have invested so much time dissing the talent in this draft, we have tricked ourselves into believing that no one in this draft will become a superstar. Reason number 4) We have fallen into the common trap of believing that “what we know now, we, too, knew back then.” What I mean by that is.... we watch Chris Paul, Deron Williams and Derrick Rose and our confirmation bias gets the best of us, we start believing that, from day one, we saw the super star ability in those players. All of this concludes with our overrating how bad this draft actually is (I’m not saying it isn’t bad) and how good others before it were, and at the same time, has us selling short at the very easy chance that Kyrie Irving will become a superstar in this league.

It’s the same scenario as to why, for younger generation people, Saturday Night Live sucks these days. We compare it to the nineties and when we look back at the names Chris Farley, David Spade, Dana Carvey, Mike Myers, and Adam Sandler and all of the sudden Paul Brittain and Jay Pharoah look like a load of untalented crap. What it comes down to is--Adam Sandler wasn’t the Adam Sandler we now know him to be.

I’m not here to be a huge Cleveland homer by making my case that Irving will be a super star in this league because, really, I have no clue. No one does. All I’m suggesting is that you are lying to yourself if you don’t believe he has a great potential.

I am going to be the bigger man and admit that, back when Derrick Rose was drafted, I didn’t see him winning an MVP in his third year. I’m also going to admit that I didn’t consider how Deron Williams would end up being one of 2012 free agent pieces that could swing a title. I didn’t see Chris Paul turning out to become the best pure point guard in the entire NBA. And to further destroy my credibility, I’ll tell you that, yes, I was worried that LeBron would amount to nothing more than an overhyped high school prodigy. Oh and one last thing, back in the day I thought Adam Sandler was the Joel Anthony of SNL.

Everyone is so quick to deem him as not having the potential to be in the upper tier of NBA players, but how often does someone go number one in the draft and one of their attributes is--plays good defense? Answer: Not often. How often does a number one pick shoot 90 percent from the line? Heck, how often does anyone in college shoot 90 percent from the line? Answer: Not often. How often does Mike Krzyzewski start a freshman point guard on a defending national championship team? Before this year what were the chances Mike Krzyzewski allows a freshman point guard, who missed nearly all of the season with injury, to resume play in the NCAA tournament for a team with a number one seed risking the team possible interference of team chemistry?

Compared to Rose, I see Irving already being a better passer and all around shooter. Irving is a pure point guard, but he can score the ball effectively. His 17 plus points per game, albeit was only 11 games, was more than Paul, Williams, or Rose ever had in college and it was on a very balanced team. Kyrie also tops all three PG’s with his FG%, FT%, and 3P%. Rose and Paul are far supperior at getting to the basket, but when people note that they make it seem like Irving can’t do it at all when in fact he’s above average. I would put Irving right up there wit the three of them in terms of “in the open court” offense. I am comparing Irving to Paul and Williams because....

Let me take you back to 2005 when Deron Williams and Chris Paul were taken.

Andrew Bogut and Marvin Williams went 1 and 2. Deron Williams went at 3, followed by Chris Paul at 4. Basically, Deron Williams and Chris Paul were drafted after a slow Australian guy who broke onto the scene late, and a forward who didn’t even start for his college team whom the Hawks took when they clearly, I repeat, clearly needed a point guard. Paul and Williams were not can’t miss talents, just as Irving was never labeled a can’t miss talent.

Going into the 2005 draft, the draft class was said to have “no potential super stars.” If you disagree with me that it was superstar-less because you know Paul and Williams are both superstars then just go back and watch the 2005 draft on youtube and listen to everyone definitively say so. You can even go back and read pre draft columns and see the same opinions of the draft class. It was said to be, I quote, “ A super-star free draft with a never ending supply of foreigners and guys with great upside.”

There is a consensus that Irving is a poor mans version of Chris Paul. I don’t know what kind of degrees of poor there are, but, well, being a poor version of anyone is never a good thing. But hey who am I kidding, there is more good than bad that can come from a player who is supposed to turn out as “a poor mans version of Chris Paul” rather than a guy who is supposed to turn out as “the next LeBron James.”

Follow Us

cleveland.com is powered by Plain Dealer Publishing Co. and Northeast Ohio Media Group. All rights reserved (About Us).The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Northeast Ohio Media Group LLC.